Youth Empowerment free essay sample

Youth empowerment is a process whereby young people gain the ability and authority to make decisions and implement change in their own lives. In Nigeria, youth empowerment occurs in homes, at schools, through youth organizations, government policy-making, reality Tv Shows, and community organizing campaigns. Youth empowerment ranges from economic empowerment to social, Ideological, educational, technological and political empowerment. The term â€Å"youth empowerment† combines two important words (â€Å"youth† and â€Å"empowerment† which must be defined differently. The United Nations, for statistical purposes, defines ‘youth’, as those persons between the ages of 15 and 24 years. While the Webster Dictionary (1998), defines empowerment in three ways â€Å"(1) to give official authority or legal power to; (2) enable; (3) to promote the self actualization or influence. † The strategy proscribed by the first definition can be quite effective provided that the party being empowered already has the competencies needed to achieve the desired outcome. The strategy does not work well when it is plugged into a framework of youth development in which empowerment itself is being used as a strategy for developing competencies in youth. We will write a custom essay sample on Youth Empowerment or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page , youth empowerment does the following for African youths: The ability to make decisions about personal/collective circumstances, The ability to access information and resources for decision making, Ability to consider a range of options from which to choose Ability to exercise assertiveness in collective decision making, Having positive-thinking about the ability to make change, Ability to learn and access skills for improving personal/collective circumstance. Ability to inform others’ perceptions though exchange, education and engagement. Historically speaking, it is not clear when the term ‘Youth Empowerment’ entered into the Nigerian socio-political and economic vocabulary. The term perhaps, resonates more as an attempt by stakeholders to draw attention to the ecological degradation and economic ‘powerlessness’ of those living in the oil rich Niger Delta area of Nigeria. The Niger Delta youth adopted militant approach to fight for resource control in the region. The Federal Government responded by arresting what they perceive as youth restiveness in the Niger Delta, and hus, introduced various program targeted at diverting the attention of the youths. This might have influenced their use of the term ‘youth empowerment’ as a new vocabulary in governance. In the words of A. Emielu (2008), the concept of youth empowerment in the Niger Delta area could be seen more as a negotiated relationship between government agencies and the ‘restive youths’, born more out of fear of destabilizing the national economy, than by the need to develop the creative potentials of the Nigerian youth. A State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy was launched by the State Government in 2004 as a plan of action aimed at tackling the problems of development in Taraba State. The essence of developing the plan was to reduce poverty, generate employment, create wealth and re-orientate the value system in the State and pave way for sustainable development over a short to medium term from 2005 to 2007. Therefore This research seeks to examine the evolution of youth empowerment in Taraba State with emphasis on young people both in rural and urban areas of the state. If empowering young people means creating and supporting the enabling conditions under which young people can act on their own behalf, and on their own terms, rather than at the direction of others, this study therefore sets out to present a historical analysis of what the Taraba State government has been able to provide since its creation in 1991 to empower the youths. Youth empowerment free essay sample 1, Install Norton 360. 2, Make up the details when it asks to register, It is advised to make note of the email and password. 3, Turn of Norton Tamper Protection. 4, Reboot your computer 5, Continuously press F8 on your keyobard BEFORE the windows is starting screen. 6, Select safe mode with networking 7, Once at the desktop (SAFE MODE) open the trial reset as admin. 8, Select convert and it should automatically restart your computer. 8, Open Norton 360 and it should ask you to log in simply enter the detail you did before or make up new details and now you can enjoy 😀 Yes you can update the program with out any issues. This should work for Windows XP, Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8 ! If you have any issues please leave a comment below or send me a message on YouTube. Virus Scan of the setup provided in the link above: If this tutorial helped you please leave a like and if you wish to subscribe for more awesome tutorials 🙂 I do not own the provided applications I have simple shown how to use them for educational purposes. We will write a custom essay sample on Youth empowerment or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Youth empowerment is an attitudinal, structural, and cultural process whereby young people gain the ability, authority, and agency to make decisions and implement change in their own lives and the lives of other people, including youth and adults.[1] Youth empowerment is often addressed as a gateway to intergenerational equity, civic engagement and democracy building. Many local, state, provincial, regional, national, and international government agencies and nonprofit community-based organizations provide programs centered on youth empowerment[2]. Activities involved therein may focus on youth-led media, youth rights, youth councils, youth activism, youth involvement in community decision-making[3], and other methods. Everyone seems to be talking about empowerment these days, female empowerment, workers empowerment, and youth empowerment are just some of the phrases that are flying around. But what exactly does that empowerment mean, and how can one apply the concept to their own life? History of Youth Empowerment: The youth empowerment movement started in the 1960s, when students at universities across the United States began to get involved in politics and protests on campus. Even earlier than that, campuses and students had played a large role in the Civil Rights movement and in other political and social movements, but for the first time youth and students began to be seen as political and social actors. In response to the Vietnam War, student protests and organizations sprung up, and students demanded the right to be heard. Since those rebellious days, youth empowerment has calmed down significantly, but it continues to be an important part of childhood development and an essential phase of the transition to adulthood. Typically taking place during High School and college years, the transition is accompanied by increased involvement in student activities and a growing independence in making life choices and choosing a personal direction. At the [continues] Read full essay Youth Empowerment free essay sample Youth empowerment is an attitudinal, structural, and cultural process whereby young people gain the ability, authority, and agency to make decisions and implement change in their own lives and the lives of other people, including youth and adults. [l] Youth empowerment is often addressed as a gateway to intergenerational equity, civic engagement and democracy building. Many local, state, provincial, regional, national, and international government agencies and nonprofit community-based organizations provide programs centered on youth empowerment[2]. Activities nvolved therein may focus on youth-led media, youth rights, youth councils, youth activism, youth involvement in community decision-making[3], and other methods. Everyone seems to be talking about empowerment these days, female empowerment, workers empowerment, and youth empowerment are Just some of the phrases that are flying around. But what exactly does that empowerment mean, and how can one apply the concept to their own life? History of Youth Empowerment: The youth empowerment movement started in the 1960s, when students at universities across the United States began to get involved in politics and protests on ampus. We will write a custom essay sample on Youth Empowerment or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Even earlier than that, campuses and students had played a large role in the Civil Rights movement and in other political and social movements, but for the first time youth and students began to be seen as political and social actors. In response to the Vietnam War, student protests and organizations sprung up, and students demanded the right to be heard. Since those rebellious days, youth empowerment has calmed down significantly, but it continues to be an important part of childhood development and an essential phase of the transition to adulthood. Typically taking place during High School and ollege years, the transition is accompanied by increased involvement in student activities and a growing independence in making life choices and choosing a personal direction. At the same time, young teens making that transition to adulthood learn to make their own decisions and stick by them, and hopefully to learn from their own mistakes. It is a time when young people being to go out into the world on their own and to learn how to succeed on their own terms. How to encourage youth empowerment: Because youth empowerment and personal growth are so important for young people to learn, the process should be encouraged and understood. During this difficult period of transition, young adults often have many questions and issues, and parents and families should try to respond in a sensitive way to the specific needs of the children. One of the most common and beneficial ways to encourage personal growth and empowerment is to give young adults increased responsibilities in their own lives. An after-school Job, for example, can be a great way to teach a growing child about the important of time management, while giving them a chance to earn some personal money. Just as important as letting them take the Job is letting them se the money they earn for the things they like. Secondly, school organizations and clubs are also a place for growing teens to become involved in their community and clubs to a music group can teach your child valuable skills while helping them explore their own interests. Finally, summer internships can also be a valuable way to give children and students work experience and Job skills at a young age. Internships can also get youth thinking about possible career opportunities or directions for their own future, and are a great opportunity for making them feel independent and on their own. Possible problems with youth empowerment: As children grow older and begin to set out on their own path and take charge of their lives, it is common for problems to arise between them and their parents. Often, a rebellious phase accompanies issues of youth empowerment, and a child may feel they need additional space from their family to grown in their own direction and under their own control. The best thing to do in these cases is often for a parent or family to show that they care about heir child and to encourage them to explore on their own, with the support of the family when they need it. Letting children take on their own challenges and treating them with respect and dignity as they do so is likely to bring out a more responsible and respectful attitude in the child themselves. And while giving advice is a common desire by parents who want to spare their children the pain of making mistakes, often learning through trial and error is an integral part of growing up and becoming self-empowered. As children grow up and begin to set out on their own, through youth empowerment and increased self- direction, they should be encouraged and given positive feedback. Being a child is ard enough, especially in the transition to adulthood, and understanding and sensitive parents can be a major help in successfully making that transition. Empowering Youth As I have stated a little while ago, the major thrust of our new National Youth Policy is Youth Empowerment. This is being achieved through various initiatives taken by both the Goverm-nent and Non Governmental Organizations. The reduction of the minimum voting age from 21 to 18 in the year 1989 and a legislative measure taken in 1992 providing for reservation of one third of the seats for women in the village dministrative units called Panachayats have enabled young people and young women to influence the decision making process in the country. Youth participation in the decision making bodies has been considerably enhanced by these decisions. It has been rightly recognized that access to education and training has to be augmented so that youth can develop their competencies. The National Policy of Education(NPE) 1986, has provided for designing both formal and non-formal education programmes involving youth. Our literacy rate has increased to 52. 91 percent in 1991. Today, 94 percent of the rural habitations have school facHities. Gross enrolment ratio at the primary stage has also increased to 100 percent in most of the states. Now we have a goal of Education for All by 2000 A. D. To achieve, this goal, vigorous efforts are being made. The education system is periodically evaluated and curricula updated in accordance with the advancements in Science and Technology. Efforts are also made to make the education relevant to the market needs and economic demands without compromising on the ethical and moral values of education. In the employment sector, the thrust is on providing opportunities for self employment, entrepreneurship development and skill training. Prime Ministers RoJgar YoJana, Jawhar RoJgar YoJana, etc. , have been introduced wherein minimum employment and wage earning opportunities are provided for poor yquth in the rural areas. The initiatives have been further strengthened with the promotion and development of Small Scale Industries. 16 million persons were employed in the small scale sector in 1996-97. An important scheme called, Training of Rural Youth for Self Employment(TRYSEM) is being implemented. Young women re provided training in skills and encouraged to form thrift and micro credit groups. To provide access to information on education, employment and other services, dissemination of information is accorded high priority. Employment guidance and counseling centres have been functioning in the country. Human rights education and awareness on gender equity are being carried out through youth organizations. A National Commission for Women was set up by the Government of India and a National Human Rights Commission had also been set up to advise on the policies and programmes. Young people are involved in health services. India has a well designed health prograrnmes. Young people are involved in creating awareness on health issues, more particularly on drug abuse, HIWAII DS etc. Primary Health Centres and Village Health Guides provide basic health care facilities to the youth. To prevent drug abuse by young people, Government of India has adopted the strategy of supply control and demand reduction of drugs through stringent enforcement of Anti Narcotic Laws, treatment and rehabilitation of addicts and involvement of community and youth in the process. Every generation needs a new revolution. † Thomas Jefferson The young do not know enough to be prudent, and therefore they attempt the impossible, and achieve it, generation after generation. Pearl S. Buck Empowerment can mean many different things. To families on Supernanny, empowerment is learning to use the tools that stabilize their homes. To oppressed women in foreign lands, empowerment is embracing an opportunity to make a choice or participate in government. To youth, empowerment is knowing someones listening to their ideas and recognizing them as valuable members of society. Whether were mayors, teachers, neighbors or parents, we all ave roles to play in empowering youth. We do it † or dont do it- in most interactions we have with young people. On Pass the Torch, I write frequently about how young people take initiative and accomplish outstanding things (case in point- Heather Wilder † you can still vote for her through July 25. ) There are countless examples of youth doing great things, raising money for charity, or making connections for those who cant. But empowering youth is also the small, daily opportunities adults have with young people, to ask their opinions, listen to their ideas, teach them new skills or even follow their lead. Each interaction like this helps kids to find their own voices, to fgure out their strengths, and to pursue what inspires them. In the course of writing the book, Empowering Youth: How to Encourage Young Leaders to Do Great Things, I had the opportunity to interview dozens of inspiring people. One of the most memorable quotes for me, was shared by Julia Hampton, United Way Youth Initiative Coordinator: Empowerment is having confidence because someone has spoken it into you. Its the track coach that gives the helps his son prepare to confront a friend by role-playing the conversation. Its the teacher that notices a students strength in writing and encourages her to submit an essay. Its the business owner that says yes to the kid who asks to place a food drive box in the entry. Its the neighbor that sends her kids to a neighborhood book club to support the 11-year-old whos organizing it. Its every day seeing children, Just as we see adults. Its recognizing their lack of experience or education doesnt mean their input isnt valid. And its a willingness to concede that every once in a while their insight is better than our own.

Fv Project Summary of Fasb and Iasb Essays

Fv Project Summary of Fasb and Iasb Essays Fv Project Summary of Fasb and Iasb Essay Fv Project Summary of Fasb and Iasb Essay Project Summary Background The objective of this project is to provide guidance to entities on how they should measure the fair value of assets and liabilities when required by other Standards. This project will not change when fair value measurement is required by IFRSs. Discussion at the September 2005 IASB Meeting At the September 2005 meeting, the IASB added the Fair Value Measurements topic to its agenda. The aim of the project is to provide guidance to entities on how they should measure the fair value of assets and liabilities when required by other Standards. This project will not change when fair value measurement is required by IFRSs. Discussion at the November 2005 IASB Meeting The staff conducted an education session on the FASBs working draft of a final Statement on Fair Value Measurements. In addition, the staff reviewed the scope of FASBs Fair Value Measurements project as it relates to IFRSs and the issues and questions to be addressed in preparing an IASB Exposure Draft and related Invitation to Comment. No decisions were made. At a previous meeting, the Board decided to issue the FASBs final Statement on Fair Value Measurements as an IASB Exposure Draft with an Invitation to Comment. The appendices in the FASB document dealing with consequential amendments and references to US GAAP pronouncements will be replaced with proposed consequential amendments and references to IFRSs. The Board further decided that there should be limited changes to the FASBs document. Instead, the Invitation to Comment should discuss any areas where the Board disagrees with the FASBs conclusions along with the basis for the disagreement. : The staff expects these areas to be identified during Board deliberations during the December 2005 and January 2006 meetings whilst aiming toward issuance of the IASB Exposure Draft by April 2006. Discussion at the December 2005 IASB Meeting Definition of fair value The staff presented a paper identifying and comparing the differences between the definitions of fair value in the FASBs draft Fair Value Measurements (FVM) standard to the definition in IFRS. This comparison was meant to assist the Board in concluding whether or not to replace the current IFRS definition of fair value with the FVM standard definition. The staffs overall recommendation was to replace the current IFRS definition of fair value with the definition of fair value in the FVM standard. However, the staff made it clear that it was not stating that this definition be applied to all instances where fair value is currently used in IFRS. This scoping issue is the subject for a separate discussion that would span several Board meetings. The Board discussed in detail, the various components of the current and proposed definition of fair value in the context of the staffs analysis. Although the Board was in overall agreement to proceed with the proposed definition in the FVM standard, the following points were noted: Certain Board members wanted to see the various issues discussed pulled together and presented in some logical manner that would clarify how fair value is approached. As noted below, the Board was concerned that the proposed definition would cause confusion where this was not the intention. Some Board members were concerned about changing amount to price as this would change the meaning of fair value. This concern seemed to emanate around the treatment of transaction costs. The explicit discussion of exit values in the draft guidance was seen by some as problematic. Illustrations were provided indicating that at the time of the transaction; the agreed price constitutes both an entry and exit value for t hat specific asset or liability. Others indicated that it was their belief that the current fair value definition already encompasses an exit value notion. Following on from this issue, the notion of marketplace participants is believed by some Board members to be a less superior phrase to the widely accepted knowledgeable, willing parties notion which is more readily understood to apply to a transaction between two parties without the necessity of the existence of a market. The FASBs rationale for introducing the marketplace participants notion as a means of excluding to the greatest extent possible, any entity specific factors when determining fair value, was noted. The Board will be asked to debate the meaning of the reference market notion at subsequent meetings. Scope of the Fair Value Measurements Project The Board considered a paper setting out on a Standard by Standard basis, which individual standards should be scoped in or out of this project. That paper was organised into three sections: Standards that require fair value measurement Standards that require fair value measurement by reference to another standard Standards that do not require fair value measurement Within each of these sections, the staff made various proposals for the Boards consideration. Overall, the staff recommended not modifying as part of this project existing reliability clauses and practicability exceptions. The staff concluded that such modifications could result in significant changes to current practice and that any changes should be considered on a standard-by-standard basis separately from this project. Standards that require fair value measurement The following standards were noted as requiring assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value in certain circumstances: (a) IAS 11 Construction Contracts (b) IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment (c) IAS 17 Leases (d) IAS 18 Revenue (e) IAS 19 Employee Benefits (f) IAS 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance (g) IAS 26 Accounting and Reporting by Retirement Benefit Plans (h) IAS 33 Earnings per Share (i) IAS 36 Impairment of Assets (j) IAS 38 Intangible Assets (k) IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement (l) IAS 40 Investment Propert y (m) IAS 41 Agriculture (n) IFRS 1 First-time Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (o) IFRS 2 Share-based Payment (p) IFRS 3 Business Combinations and the June 2005 Exposure Draft (q) IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations The Board agreed with the staff recommendations (as set out in the observer notes) for each standard except in the following instances: IAS 18 the staff concluded that in the instances where an entity received services for dissimilar goods or services, the measurement objective is not consistent with the draft FVM standard and therefore IAS 18 should be excluded from the scope. The Board noted this issue but indicated a preference to include IAS 18 within the scope of the FVM Standard as this is a minor part of the fair value requirements in IAS 18. The confusion caused in the market if the Board were to exclude IAS 18 from the project would be undesirable. IFRS 2 due to the grant date model, the Board noted the issue that may arise where an entity measures a share-based payment transaction by reference to the equity instruments granted, not the goods or services received. However, the Board decided to include IFRS 2 within the scope of the FVM Standard on the same basis as for IAS 18. Standards that require fair value measurement by reference to another standard (a) IAS 2 Inventory (b) IAS 21 The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates (c) IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements (d) IAS 28 Investment in Associates (e) IAS 31 Interests in Joint Ventures (f) IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation and Disclosure (g) IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts (h) IFRS 7 Financial Instruments The Board agreed with the staff recommendation that discussion of the above is not necessary as these standards do not contain any additional requirements to measure assets or liabilities at fair value. Standards that do not require fair value measurement (a) IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements (b) IAS 7 Cash Flow Statements (c) IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors (d) IAS 10 Events After the Balance Sheet Date (e) IAS 12 Income Taxes (f) IAS 14 Segment Reporting (g) IAS 23 Borrowing Costs (h) IAS 24 Related Party Disclosures (i) IAS 29 Financial Reporting in Hyperinflationary Economies (j) IAS 30 Disclosures in the Financial Statements of Banks and Similar Financial Institutions (k) IAS 34 Interim Financial Reporting (l) IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets (m) IFRS 6 Exploration for and Evaluations of Mineral Reserves With regard to IAS 37, the Board concurred with the staff that the measurement principles therein are consistent with fair value principles in many respects and went further to state that when the amendments to IAS 37 are finalised, it would add explicit reference to fair value to clarify this issue. Discussion at the February 2006 IASB Meeting This was a brief session to inform the Board about recent tentative decisions of the FASB on its fair value measurement standard. No observer notes were provided for this session. The FASB discussed the fair value hierarchy at its last meeting. FASBs exposure draft had proposed a five-level fair value hierarchy. The FASB has come to the conclusion that it is difficult to distinguish levels two to four in the hierarchy. They have therefore reduced the hierarchy to three levels. The FASB has not made other changes to its proposed fair value guidance. The staff said that discussion will continue in March. Discussion at the May 2006 IASB Meeting Principles of the fair value measurement project The following principles were put to the Board as those forming the foundation of the fair value measurement project: The objective of a fair value measurement is to determine the price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in a transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The definition of fair value and its measurement objective should be consistent for all fair value measurements required by IFRS. A fair value measurement should reflect market views of the attributes of the asset or liability being measured and should not include views of the reporting entity that differ from market expectations. A fair value measurement should consider the utility of the asset or liability being measured. As such, the fair value measurement should consider the location and the condition of the asset or liability at its measurement date. The Board concurred with the staff that the above principles form the foundation of the fair value measurement project. Revised definition of fair value In the staffs view, the FASBs revised definition of fair value is substantively similar to the one tentatively approved by the IASB in December 2005. Based on that, the IASB agreed that the revised definition is consistent with the measurement objective. However, some Board members expressed concern about the change to a price rather than amount. In addition, the revised definition is based on an exit price notion that does not consider prices that exist other than the exit price. As a consequence, other Board members noted that the current definition will require measurement based on a hypothetical market that, for some types of assets and liabilities, cannot be calibrated with reality and in most cases will result in day 1 gains or losses, which constituents are uncomfortable with. Revised fair value hierarchy The draft fair value measurement statement indicates that valuation techniques used to measure fair value shall maximise the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The hierarchy prioritises the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value based on their observable or unobservable nature. The revised three-level hierarchy is summarised as follows: Level 1 inputs are observable inputs that reflect quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date. Level 2 inputs are observable inputs other than quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets at the measurement date. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs, for example, inputs derived through extrapolation or interpolation that cannot be corroborated by observable data. However, the fair value measurement objective remains the same. Therefore, unobservable inputs should be adjusted for entity information that is inconsistent with market expectations. Unobservable inputs should also consider the risk premium a market participant (buyer) would demand to assume the inherent uncer tainty in the unobservable input. IFRSs currently does not have a single hierarchy that applies to all fair value measures. Instead individual standards indicate preferences for certain inputs and measures of fair value over others, but this guidance is not consistent among all IFRSs. The Board agreed with the staffs conclusion that the revised hierarchy in the draft fair value measurement statement is consistent with the principles discussed above and that the hierarchy in the draft fair value measurement statement represents an improvement over the disparate and inconsistent guidance currently in IFRSs. Unit of account and fair value measurements The Board agreed that it is not appropriate or practical to provide detailed guidance on the unit of account within the fair value measurement project. Determining the appropriate unit of account is a critical element of accounting and is not always consistent from one asset or liability to another or from one type of transaction to another. Determination of which market The Board agreed with the FASBs conclusion to adopt the principal market view. While this will result in a change from the most advantageous view currently in IFRS, the principal market view more accurately reflects the fair value measurement objective and provides a more representative measure of fair value by giving preference to highly liquid markets over less liquid markets. Transaction price presumption At the December 2005 meeting, the IASB tentatively agreed the fair value measurement objective was an exit price. The December discussion highlighted the conceptual difference between transaction price (what an entity would pay to buy an asset or receive to assume a liability) and an exit price objective (what an entity would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability). The staff concluded that an entity cannot presume an entry price to be equal to an exit price without considering factors specific to the transaction and the asset or liability. As a consequence, the staff plans to bring a separate discussion of day 1 gains or losses to the Board at a future meeting. The Board shared the concerns of the staff that if a transaction price were presumed to be fair value on initial measurement, entities might not sufficiently consider the differences between an entry transaction price and an exit fair value. As such, IFRSs should require an entity to consider factors specific to the transaction and the asset or liability in assessing if the transaction price represents fair value. Fair value within the bid-ask spread Entities often transact somewhere between the bid and ask pricing points, particularly if the entity is a market maker or an influential investor. However, application of the rule in IAS 39 results in consistency across entities without consideration of entity specific factors that may influence where within the bid-ask spread the entity is likely to transact. Further, the rule creates a bright-line in quoted markets, thus limiting the use of judgement and subjectivity in the fair value measurement. The Board agreed to add a discussion to the invitation to comment that communicates agreement with the principle in the draft fair value measurement statement. The discussion would state that it is not appropriate to use a consistently applied pricing convention as a practical expedient to fair value. This recommendation would result in both a change to existing IFRSs as well as a departure from the FASBs draft fair value measurement statement. Transaction and transportation costs in measuring fair value The definitions of transaction type costs vary in IFRSs, though such costs are consistently excluded from fair value measurements. Currently, IFRSs are not clear (with the exception of IAS 41) whether transportation costs are an attribute of the asset or liability, and as such should be included in the fair value measurement. The draft fair value measurement statement defines transaction costs as the incremental direct costs to transact in the principal or most advantageous market. Incremental direct costs are costs that result directly from, and are essential to, a transaction involving an asset (or liability). Incremental direct costs are costs that would not be incurred by the entity if the decision to sell or dispose of the asset (or transfer the liability) was not made. In the draft fair value measurement statement, the FASB concluded the fair value measurement of the asset or liability shall include only those costs that are an attribute of the asset or liability. The FASB concluded transaction costs are an attribute of the transaction, not an attribute of the asset or liability. Therefore the fair value measurement of the asset or liability shall not include transaction costs. The staff agreed with the conclusions in the draft FVM statement regarding transportation and transaction costs. However, the staff concluded that the discussion of what types of costs are attributes of the asset or liability could be more robust as it is difficult to decipher justification for different treatment of transaction costs and transportation costs in the current discussion in the draft FVM statement. As such, the staff recommended, and the Board agreed that the invitation to comment should include a question on the sufficiency of the discussion of costs that are attributes of an asset or liability, such as transportation costs. Discussion at the June 2006 IASB Meeting The Board continued its discussion of Fair Value Measurements (FVM), and reviewed the current project plan and due process steps. In addition, the Board had a preliminary discussion on accounting for day-one gains. Project Plan and Due Process The Board was briefly updated on the developments from the last FASB meeting at which the Fair Value Measurements project was discussed. The Fair Value Measurement project was added to the IASBs agenda in September 2005. At that time, the Board decided that they would expose the FASBs final FVM standard as an IASB exposure draft, not modifying it other than change US GAAP references to the appropriate IFRS references. Since then, the staff has become aware of concerns raised by IASB constituents. These include: As the FVM project could change how fair value is measured, some think that proceeding directly to an IASB exposure draft based on the final FASB document could potentially short-cut the IASBs due process requirements. As the FASB document applies a different concept of fair value from that of older IFRSs, constituents have problems with the conceptual reasons for changing to an exit price objective of fair value, particularly when an entity have no intention to sell an asset. As fair value is being increasingly used, fundamental questions regarding relevance and reliability need to be debated prior to completion of the project. Due to these concerns, the staff presented the Board with two alternative solutions: The first alternative was a modified plan which still would include issuing the FASB document as an exposure draft, in addition to conducting field visits and round-table discussions to get input from constituents. The second alternative was to issue the FA SB document as a discussion paper, deliberate this, and then issue an exposure draft. This would allow the Board more time and more flexibility to address the concerns raised by constituents and hopefully a better standard, even if this route will be a longer one. The Board expressed sympathy for the concerns raised by the constituents, and the majority of Board members agreed that this would require a shift from the current project plan to alternative two which is to issue the FASB document as a discussion paper. However some Board members thought that the second alternative should be avoided as this would delay the issuing of a final standard too long. Alternative two will result in a final IFRS in late 2008 or early 2009. Some Board members thought that it would be crucial to communicate with constituents that this move away from the current project plan and towards the discussion paper route would take more time, but that it would be done to ensure the interest of constituents. The Board voted in favour of alternative two, resulting in a discussion paper being issued based on the FASB document. The Board noted that a final plan could not be put together before the final FASB document is issued. As long as the FASB have not issued their final document including, e. . their application guidance, the IASB will not have a public document accessible for issuing as the IASBs discussion paper. Day-one Gains and Losses Fair value, as defined in the FASBs document is an exit price. As a result of the Boards tentative approval of the exit price definition of fair value, in circumstances where an asset or a liability is required to be measu red at fair value on initial recognition, a day-one gain or loss may be recorded. The staff believes the existing guidance in IAS 39 is inconsistent with the exit price notion as tentatively approved by the Board, and therefore needs amendment. The Board was asked whether they would consider: To make only consequential amendments to conform IAS 39 with the guidance in the Fair Value Measurement statement and to leave the current guidance on recognition of day-one gains and losses in IAS 39. Making consequential amendments and change the existing guidance in IAS 39. The Board decided that they would not make any amendments right now, but rather put a question in the discussion paper whether this should be dealt with in a separate project or as a part of the Fair Value Measurement project. September 2006: FASB issues fair value measurement standard On 15 September 2006, the US Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157 Fair Value Measurements. FAS 157 provides enhanced guidance for using fair value to measure assets and liabilities. It applies whenever other standards require (or permit) assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value. FAS 157 does not expand the use of fair value in any new circumstances. Click for: FASB News Release (PDF 19k) Special issue of the Heads Up Newsletter Summarising FAS 157 (PDF 218k) Some points about FAS 157: Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants in the market in which the reporting entity transacts. Fair value should be based on the assumptions market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. FAS 157 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritis es the information used to develop those assumptions. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and the lowest priority to unobservable data, for example, the reporting entitys own data. Fair value measurements would be separately disclosed by level within the fair value hierarchy. FAS 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after 15 November 2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. FAS 157 may be downloaded from FASBs Website without charge. The IASB has on its agenda a project on fair value measurement. It is one of the convergence projects with the FASB. This means that the IASB and the FASB plan to have similar, if not identical, definitions and guidance relating to fair value measurements. The IASB plans to issue a discussion paper in the fourth quarter of 2006 that will: indicate the IASBs preliminary views on the provisions of FAS 157; identify differences between FAS 157 and fair value measurement guidance in existing IFRSs; and invite comments on the provisions of FAS 157 and on the IASBs preliminary views about those provisions. Discussion at the September 2006 IASB Meeting The staff noted that FAS 157 Fair Value Measurements was issued on 15 September 2006 (see IAS Plus News Story of 19 September 2006). The IASB staff can now complete the preparation of an IASB Discussion Paper on Fair Value Measurements, which will comprise: FAS 157; excerpts of existing FVM guidance in IFRSs; and an Invitation to Comment that expresses the Boards preliminary views and requests constituent input on certain matters Non-performance risk The Board noted that IFRSs currently do not discuss non-performance risk in relation to the fair value of liabilities. IAS 39 requires the fair value of a financial liability to reflect the credit quality of the instrument. Reflecting credit quality in the fair value measurement of a financial liability effectively causes the fair value measurement to reflect the risk that the obligation will not be fulfilled. FAS 157 extends this principle to the fair value measurement of both financial and non-financial liabilities. It was noted that non-financial liabilities include both credit risk (which related to the financial component) and non-performance risk (which related to the activity). After some discussion, the Board agreed to include a preliminary view in the invitation to comment agreeing with the concept that the fair value of a liability should reflect the non-performance risk relating to that liability (in addition to credit risk). Issues in the Invitation to Comment Entry and exit prices The Board agreed that the Invitation to Comment should discuss the concepts of entry and exit prices without stating a preliminary view. The Discussion Paper will address two views without stating a preference. The discussion note that the notion of a price established between a willing buyer and a willing seller matters only when one is shifting markets. In many IASB standards, fair value is used to mean an exit price; in a few (such as IFRS 3, IAS 39, and IAS 41), the phrase is used to mean an entry price. Board members found using the same phrase to communicate two different measurement objectives confusing. Board members noted that they might need to reassess the measurement objective in IFRS 3, IAS 39, and IAS 41 should they adopt the approach in FAS 157 paragraph 17(d), which allows the use of a price other than the transaction price to represent fair value if the transaction occurred in a market other than the principal or most advantageous market. The staff proposed wording on the fly, which they will bring back to the Board. Principal or most advantageous market IAS 39 requires an entity to use the most advantageous active market in measuring the fair value of a financial asset or liability when multiple markets exist, whereas IAS 41 Agriculture requires an entity to use the most relevant market. By comparison, the FAS 157 requires an entity use the principal market for the asset or liability. In the absence of a principal market for the asset or liability, the entity uses the most advantageous market. The principal market is the market in which the reporting entity would sell the asset or transfer the liability with the greatest volume and level of activity for the asset or liability. The most advantageous market is the market in which the reporting entity would sell the asset or transfer the liability with the price that maximizes the amount that would be received for the asset or minimizes the amount that would be paid to transfer the liability, considering transaction costs in the respective market(s). In either case, the principal (or most advantageous) market (and thus, market participants) should be considered from the perspective of the reporting entity, thereby allowing for differences between and among entities with different activities. The Board reconfirmed their view taken in May 2006, namely: When multiple markets exist for an asset or liability, the fair value measure should be based on the principal market for that asset or liability. If there is no principal market, the most advantageous market should be used. In both instances, the principal or most advantageous market should be determined from the perspective of the reporting entity. A question will be asked on this topic in the Invitation to Comment. Calling level 3 measurements fair value The Board noted that FAS 157 establishes a three level hierarchy for categorising and prioritising inputs for fair value measurements. Level 3 of the hierarchy is unobservable inputs for the asset or liability (that is, they are not observable in a market). Unobservable inputs are used to measure fair value only to the extent that observable inputs are not available. These inputs reflect the reporting entitys own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability (including assumptions about risk). When Level 3 measures are used, FAS 157 prescribes additional disclosures. The Board agreed that the disclosure requirements in FAS 157 highlight sufficiently the nature of the fair value measurement so that users of financial statements can develop a view of the potential uncertainty of that measurement. Therefore, it would not be necessary to include in the Discussion Paper a discussion of whether measurements comprised of significant Level 3 inputs should be labelled something other than fair value. Block premiums and discounts The Board agreed to address the issue of whether block premiums and discounts should be discussed in the Discussion Paper. Such premiums or discounts may arise when a larger-than-normal quantity of an asset or liability is being sold in a market. Board members noted that the requirement to use the Price x Quantity formula is limited to Level 1 measures, and that this opens the treatment of block purchases and sales to abuse, since it could be argued that these should be measured using Level 2 or 3 inputs. Board members also agreed that there is a need to distinguish illiquidity caused by the size of the block from that caused by the thinness of the market. The staff will draft a question on this issue for inclusion in the Invitation to Comment. Day 1 gains and losses The Board noted that an exit price measurement objective could have significant implications on certain fair value measurements in IFRSs, particularly in IAS 39 on initial recognition. They reasoned that it is important to highlight situations where the guidance in FAS 157 differs significantly from current IFRSs. Further, convergence on the day-one gain matter is a high-profile issue to many large financial institutions and is an area where the staff expects many comments. The Invitation to Comment will contain a discussion and question on the transaction price presumption. US GAAP-specific material contained in FAS 157 The Board agreed that, in the interests of timely publication, they would not alter FAS 157 in any way for the purposes of the Discussion Paper and Invitation to Comment, and that it would therefore have US GAAP-specific material. The Invitation to Comment would note that any Exposure Draft would be IFRS-specific. Next steps On a poll, 12 Board members voted to issue the Invitation to Comment and Preliminary Views, and one Board member abstained, pending resolution of the discussion of entry and exit prices. The Discussion Paper is scheduled for publication in late 2006. November 2006: Discussion Paper Issued On 30 November 2006, the IASB published for public comment a Discussion Paper on Fair Value Measurements. The Discussion Paper sets out the IASBs preliminary views on how to measure fair values when fair value measurement is already prescribed under existing IFRSs. It does not propose any extensions of the use of fair values. The DP is built around FASBs recently issued SFAS 157 Fair Value Measurements. SFAS 157 establishes a single definition of fair value together with a framework for measuring fair value for financial reports prepared in accordance with US GAAP. Click for IASB Press Release (PDF 53k). The Discussion Paper will be available without charge on the IASBs website starting 11 December 2006. Comment deadline is 2 April 2007 [extended to] 4 May 2007. The IASB plans to publish an Exposure Draft in 2008. Discussion at the January 2007 IASB Meeting Extension of the comment deadline on the Discussion Paper The staff reported that several constituents had asked the Board to extend the deadline for comments on the Boards Discussion Paper Fair Value Measurements. The constituents highlighted that the comment period coincided with the financial reporting season for those with calendar year ends and asked for more time so that an important and complex document could receive the attention it deserved. The Board agreed unanimously to extend the deadline for comments to Friday 4 May 2007. Discussion at the September 2007 IASB Meeting The staff informed the Board that the FASB had formed a Valuation Resource Group (VRG). The purpose of the VRG is to provide the FASB with input for clarifying the guidance related to the application of the principles in SFAS 157 Fair Value Measurement when fair value is required or permitted under US GAAP. The VRG is drawn from accounting firms, valuation advisers, preparers, users, regulators and standard setters. The first meeting of the VRG is planned for 1 October 2007. Issues raised at that meeting will be brought to the October FASB meeting. The IASB staff noted that any decisions made by the FASB are likely to have implications for valuations performed under IFRSs because constituents may apply the US guidance in the absence of IFRS guidance. The staff will keep the Board informed of the project. No decisions were made. Discussion at the October 2007 IASB Meeting The staff presented their analysis of comments received on the IASBs discussion paper on fair value measurement. The discussion paper was issued as a wrap around of FASB Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157. The complete analysis is available in the Observer Notes section on the IASBs website (Agenda Paper 2C). The staff asked the Board to do the following: consider the main points raised in the comment letters (136 received); affirm the project objectives; and approve the staffs preliminary project plan. The main points raised in the comment letter by constituents included (please refer to Agenda Paper 2C for a detailed analysis): General agreement to that the fair value measurement project is needed; Concerns about how to provide guidance on determining fair value when it is not clear in hich circumstances; The interaction between the fair value measurement project and the conceptual framework project (in particular, phase C which covers measurement); The view that in many situations an entry price notion is superior to an exit price notion; Fair value is more akin to a heading for a family of measurement bases and accordingly terms should be used which are more descriptive (th at is, more clearly articulate what the Boards intended measurement basis in that situation is); and With regard to measuring liabilities at fair value, the respondents raised concerns about the application of a transfer notion instead of a settlement notion and asked for guidance as to the meaning of non-performance risk. Regarding the interaction between this project and the Conceptual Framework project, some Board members noted that the outcome of this project is only one of a number of possible measurement bases that will be in the revised Framework. Consequently, the impact on the Framework project is only minor. The staff confirmed that it consults with staff of the Framework project on a regular basis. Some Board members observed that the notion entry price should be as well defined as exit price. Staff noted that this is part of the proposed project plan. No decisions were made. The Board was also asked to agree on the following project objectives: Development of principles and measurement guidance for an exit price measurement basis; and Completion of a standard-by-standard review of fair value measurements permitted or required in IFRSs to asses whether each standards measurement basis is an exit price. If the Board does not agree, will it agree to decide on a case-by-case basis whether or not to develop measurement guidance for those other measurement bases. The Board agreed to both objectives. On the second bullet point, it was clarified that this analysis will not lead to the development of additional guidance for those measurement bases that will be identified as not fitting in the definition of fair value for the purpose of the fair value measurement project. However, the Board noted that a working definition for fair value must first be agreed on before the analysis can be done. Additional Discussion at the October 2007 IASB Meeting This was an education session and accordingly no decisions were made. The session was led by representatives of the valuation profession to illustrate practical valuation concepts and issues (the complete presentation [Agenda Paper 11A] can be obtained from the Observer Notes section on the IASB Website). The focus was on the valuation methodologies used in the measurement of tangible and intangible non-financial assets. The background of the session was the Discussion Paper on Fair Value Measurements that was issued by the IASB in November 2006. The main topics of the presentation were: Value concepts in IFRSs The purchase price allocation process Overview of valuation methodologies (that is cost approach, market approach, income approach) The presenters main focus was the valuation requirements resulting from a business combination and what are the factors valuation professionals consider in such transactions. Although this was an education session only the Board showed particula r interest in certain topics of the presentation: If and how appraisers exclude entity-specific factors from their valuation models Customer-related intangible assets (separation and assumptions used in valuation) Consideration of tax in the valuation process Separation and valuation of contingent liabilities On the last point, the representatives of the valuation profession admitted that they have difficulties identifying all contingent liabilities and how to value them based on a transfer notion (that is what would an entity have to pay to pass on the risk – in contrast to a settlement notion). Discussion at the November 2007 IASB Meeting The staff began the morning session by informing the Board about the latest developments in relation to the implementation of SFAS 157 Fair Value Measurements which is the basis for the Discussion Paper published by the IASB. The developments included the deferral of the effective date of SFAS 157 for non-recurring measurements (for example in business combinations). It was noted that these developments would have no impact on the IASB project on fair value measurements. The staff presented its preliminary definitions of current exit price and current entry price for assets and liabilities that will be used in the standard-by-standard review. The Board and the staff reiterated that they do not want to change the measurement within the standards. The goal of the analysis carried out by the staff would be to find out which measurement attribute the Board and its predecessor (the IASC) had in mind when using the term fair value. The preliminary working definitions of the staff are as follows: Assets: Current entry price: The price that would be paid to buy an asset in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. o Current exit price: The price that would be received to sell an asset in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Liabilities: o Current entry price: The price that would be received to incur a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. o Current exit price I (transfer notion): The price that would be paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. o Current exit price II (settlement notion): The price that would be paid to settle a liability in an orderly transaction at the measurement date. At the request of a Board member staff confirmed that possible components of fair value will be addressed in later stages of the project. The staff also confirmed that it will involve practitioners to gain insight into current valuation practice in the specific circumstances. The Board had a short discussion on certain aspects of fair value measurement and was informed by staff that some of the issues will be discussed at the December Board meeting. The Board agreed on the preliminary definitions of current entry price and current exit price for assets and liabilities and that staff should not consider other measurement bases for the purpose of the standard-by-standard review. Discussion at the December 2007 IASB Meeting The purpose of this session was to continue the deliberations on the issues in the Fair Value Measurements Discussion Paper and to present an analysis of the market participants view under SFAS 157 compared to the knowledgeable, willing parties in an arms length transaction in IFRSs. After staff review of the two approaches, the Board was asked if it agrees with the staff analysis on the market participants view. Some Board members raised concerns about the possible differences of the notion market participants view in comparison to a knowledgeable, willing party. The staff noted that they see no differences in content. One Board member asked why a change in terminology would then be necessary as constituents are familiar with the notion of a knowledgeable, willing party. Other Board members said that the document must make clear that the terms are interchangeable. After this the Board discussed what a market is and whether, for certain transactions, one can assume a market exists if, for example, actually only two parties are acting. As no definition of market was provided, the Board asked the staff to develop an analysis. As all further discussions depend on the outcome of that analysis the Board agreed to postpone discussion of the other items in the agenda paper to a later Board meeting. No further decisions were made. Discussion at the March 2008 IASB Meeting Whether the fair value measurement project should have a working group or other type of specialist advisory group The Board has on its agenda a project on fair value measurement that aims to provide guidance on how to determine fair value if a standard requires or allows fair value measurement. The staff informed the Board that it worked under the assumption that a working group would not be required as there is an overlap with existing working groups that could be involved as required. On further reflection, the staff has concluded that this approach does not work as it proved difficult to involve the other working groups without a clear mandate. The staff also believes that it would not be necessary to set up a formal working group but instead to establish a technical advisory group (TAG) that could work on a informal, as-needed basis. Information exchange could be done in person or via electronic communication. However, the IASB Due Process Handbook requires the Boards consent for not establishing a working group for a major project. One Board member raised the question whether the Valuation Resource Group of the FASB could be involved. The staff answered that this group would interpret and implement SFAS 157, the US standard providing fair value measurement guidance. The Board agreed not to establish a working group, but to form a technical advisory group instead. Discussion at the April 2008 IASB Meeting Representatives of the International Valuation Standards Committee (IVSC) presented an education session to the Board on four valuation issues. No decisions were made at this education session. The four issues presented by the IVSC delegation were: What is the difference between price and value? Is there a valuation difference between an entry and an exit price? Highest and best use What makes the market? What is the difference between price and value? The representatives made clear that in their view price is the amount agreed on in a transaction while value is the outcome of a valuation. In practice, most valuations assume a transaction but, depending on the purpose of the valuation exercise, a value could also be entity-specific. It was made clear that in many cases price and value would result in (nearly) the same number. It was also noted that the IVSC standards use three types of valuation with two of them taking a market view and one of them being an entity-specific approach – which could possibly result in different amounts for the same valuation object. Some Board members were confused by the terminology used by the presenters and it was agreed that this could be the cause for much confusion within the constituency and that any communication by the Board must clearly articulate what they mean. One Board member noted that value must always be accompanied by an adjective as people understand different things in different situations. Other Board members were confused about where the difference in amounts results from. The IVSC representatives explained that there are many reasons (for example, synergies). Is there a valuation difference between an entry and an exit price? The delegation moved then on to the second question. The representatives explained that the profession holds the view that for non-entity-specific values entry and exit price for the same market should be the same. Often a perceived difference results because entry price is determined on a different market than the exist price. The Board had a lengthy discussion on that issue with a view on the guidance in US GAAP. Highest and best use The highest and best use is terminology from the US GAAP standard SFAS 157 Fair Value Measurements that assumes an entity would also use its asset the best way it can. It was highlighted that the SFAS 157 definition is very similar to the IVSC one. It was noted that this is not a different type or basis of value and that it is inherent in any basis that requires the estimate of an open market transaction. Some Board members expressed their doubt that this always could be assumed for liabilities. What makes the market? The representatives explained that there is an opinion that fair values could only be made where active markets exist. They made it clear that in their view this is not the case. The valuation profession assumes as long as there is enough evidence to establish a valuation it is assumed that a market exist even if the degree of reliability is lower than that for a market with frequent transactions. They would not necessarily link value and liquidity. The Board showed interest in the valuation for some of the instruments where markets have contracted recently and had some debate on that point with the representatives. The Chairman closed the session by asking the IVSC representatives if they have experts on valuing liabilities that could participate in the planned IASB technical experts group. The representatives confirmed that such experts would be available to participate in the group. Discussion at the May 2008 IASB Meeting Discussion of the Meeting of the IASB Expert Advisory Panel on Valuing Financial Instruments in Illiquid Markets The issue was added to the agenda with short notice and no observer notes were available. The staff informed the Board that the Financial Stability Forum has established an expert advisory panel to assist the IASB in enhancing its guidance on valuing financial instruments when markets are no longer active. In addition the staff noted the following: The first meeting will take place on 13 June 2008. At the first meeting the panel will decide on the form of guidance issued, e. g. est practice guidance or input for amendment of standards. The duration of the panel is expected to be two or three months. June 2008: IASB Forms an Expert Advisory Panel on Valuing Financial Instruments in Inactive Markets On 5 June 2008, the IASB formed an expe rt advisory panel on valuation of financial instruments in inactive markets, in response to Recommendations made by the Financial Stability Forum (FSF). The new panel will assist the IASB in: reviewing best practices in the area of valuation techniques, and formulating any necessary additional practice guidance on valuation methods for financial instruments and related disclosures when markets are no longer active. Organisations participating in the panel include AIG (American International Group); Basel Committee on Banking Supervision; BNP Paribas; Capital International Research Inc. ; Citigroup; Deloitte; Deutsche Bank; Ernst Young; Financial Stability Forum; Fitch Ratings; Goldman Sachs; HSBC; International Association of Insurance Supervisors; International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO); KPMG; Pioneer Investments; PricewaterhouseCoopers; Swiss Re; and UBS. FASB will have a staff observer. The first meeting of the panel will take place on 13 June 2008 in private session. A summary of the meeting will be presented to the IASB at its June 2008 meeting and will be published on its website. More Information on IASBs website. Related resources are available on our Credit Crunch Page. Discussion at the June 2008 IASB Meeting [pic]Fair Value Measurements – Expert Advisory Panel on Valuing Financial Instruments in Inactive Markets: Meeting update The staff presented a summary of the first meeting held on 13 June 2008 of the Expert Advisory Panel. The staff noted that the purpose of that meeting was to identify the issues arising on valuing financial instruments when markets are no longer active and that possible solutions will be discussed at future meetings. In addition the staff noted the following: No decision was made regarding the form of guidance the panel will provide, e. g. best practice guidance or input for amendment of standards. Subsets of the issues identified will be discussed by a subgroup of panel members at the next meetings in July (measurement issues) and August (disclosure issues). Meeting dates have not yet been confirmed. The meetings will be held in private sessions with public updates being provided at the July and September Board mee tings. The last meeting is expected to be in September 2008. Updates on the activities of the panel are also available on the IASBs website. Discussion of the Fair Value Measurements Project Following the joint IASB-FASB meeting in April 2008 the Board discussed the way forward in this project. At the joint meeting the IASB decided not to re-debate all aspects of the Fair Value Measurement discussion paper (the DP), i. e. ot to fully re-debate FAS 157 Fair Value Measurements on which the DP is based. Instead the Board agreed to redeliberate certain areas of confusion or areas in which FAS 157 had proved difficult to apply. The staff presented an analysis of issues raised in the DP and provided recommendations on whether a particular issue should be redeliberated or not. Technical aspects of fair value measurement were not discussed at this meeting. The Board agreed to discuss further the topics listed below. These topics will be redeliberated mainly because the Board did not expres s a preliminary view in the DP and/or comments received on the DP indicated a need for further discussion: The exit price measurement objective The Board agreed to consider both entry and exit notions of fair value measurement based on the standard-by-standard review currently performed by the staff. The market participant view In general the Board reaffirmed its preliminary view in the DP. However, the staff was asked to improve the wording in order to address concerns raised by constituents. In particular, it should be clarified how to apply the market participant view in cases where no market exists (for example, liabilities that cannot be transferred). Transfer vs. settlement of a liability The Board agreed to a staff analysis that this is an important cross-cutting issue for other Board projects, particularly, amendments to IAS 37. Transaction price and fair value at initial: Day one gains and losses This issue is considered to be interrelated with the entry vs. exit price issue. The principal (or most advantageous) market The Board reaffirmed the preliminary view in principal but noted that questions about the practical application needs to be resolved. Valuation of liabilities: Non-performance risk There seemed to be a broad consensus to reaffirm the preliminary view that non-performance risks needs to be considered when measuring the fair value. However, the majority of Board noted that this is an important cross-cutting and that there are unresolved issues with regard to presentation (of the counter-entry) and disaggregation. Highest and best use The staff intends to address comprehensively all issues relating to different markets. Bid-ask spreads: Applicability of mid-market pricing to all levels of the hierarchy? The staff noted that the Board still needs to reach a preliminary and that the question of which transaction costs are to be included will be addressed in this context. Issues not discussed Disclosures: Redeliberation in light of current market environment Application guidance: Redeliberation in light of current market environment Topics not to be redeliberated The Board decided not to redeliberate the following five topics: 1. Attributes (characteristics) specific to an asset or liability 2. Whether transaction costs are separate from fair value The staff intends to discuss any outstanding issues in connection with bid-ask spreads. (this sentence relates to bullet 2) 3. Three-level fair value hierarchy Accepted as described in the Discussion Paper without any further deliberations 4. The prohibition of blockage factor adjustments at all levels of the hierarchy The Board had a thorough debate on this issue. One Board member emphasised that the majority of constituents disagreed with the preliminary view expressed in the DP. Finally, there seemed to be a consensus not to redeliberate the issue but to deal with the concerns in the feedback statement. The staff was asked to review the comments received to ensure that the Board has not missed anything in reaching the preliminary view. 5. The unit of account for financial assets and liabilities The staff noted that the topics not to be discussed by the Board are broadly consistent with the principles in IFRSs and that they can therefore be addressed in the exposure draft in a way that considers the concerns raised by constituents and is consistent with FAS 157. Discussion at the July 2008 IASB Meeting – Expert Advisory Panel on Valuing Financial Instruments in Inactive Markets: Meeting update The project manager on the fair value measurement project gave an oral update on the activities of the expert advisory panel. The purpose of this panel is to assist the IASB in reviewing best practices in the area of valuation techniques as well as formulating any necessary additional guidance on valuation methods for financial instruments and related disclosures when markets are no longer active. The panel or subgroup met three times. At the kick-off meeting the panel identified specific issues that panel members felt must be addressed (such as forced transactions, the use of pricing services, illiquid markets). It was noted that there seemed to be consistency in applying the fair value measurement requirements in IAS 39 despite the use of different techniques. The staff informed the Board that there will be a draft document to be discussed end of July on those issues, but that it is not clear yet who will publish it. The panel would then turn to appropriate disclosures with the aim to have an exposure draft published in Q4/08. It was noted that there would be ongoing communications with the consolidations project team. Discussion at the July 2008 IASB Meeting At this session the staff asked the Board to decide on a definition of fair value – what is the measurement object for items with a measurement basis currently referred to as fair value? The staff acknowledged that some aspects of fair value have not been discussed yet, but will be brought to the Board at future meetings (for example, principal market and day-one gains/losses). Staffs view, however, is that whether fair value means an entry or exit price can be decided separately. The staff then turned to the standard-by-standard review as requested by the Board. This review had been requested to help the Board to decide whether: To retain the term fair value and define it appropriately, or To replace the term fair value with more specific terms more appropriate in the individual context. It was noted that a consistent definition of fair value might lead to fewer instances where the Board would require or permit its use. It was also highlighted that a precise definition of fair value would help to ensure proper application where it is required or permitted. The Board had a lengthy discussion about whether entry and exit price would be the equal for the same item on the same date in the same market. Also, the Board discussed which market an entity should refer to in measuring fair value and whether an exit price could include exit by consumption of assets. Board members expressed a range of views on these issues. No clear consensuses were reached. Some Board members observed that if the Board cannot clearly define what fair value means, it would be even more difficult for constituents in applying IFRSs. Board members said that some of the issues that are to be brought back for discussion at future meetings must be resolved before the Board can agree on a definition of fair value. The staff also asked the Board to consider whether to keep the term fair value or abandon it. The Board seemed to be split on that issue. The Board discussed whether, in measuring the exit-price fair value of an asset the entity is using, the measurement should take viewpoint of the entity or of an independent market participant. Board members views varied, and no decision was reached. The staff distributed a flow chart which was not part of the observer notes that was intended to facilitate the discussion. The Board decided that, once fair value is precisely defined, each reference to fair value in IFRSs should be assessed in relation to the definition. Where fair value as used in an IFRS is not consistent with the agreed definition, the term should be replaced with a more descriptive term. Discussion at the September 2008 IASB Meeting – Credit Crisis: Proposed amendments to disclosure requirements Please see separate project page on Amendments to IFRS 7 – Credit Crisis Discussion at the September 2008 IASB Meeting – Expert Advisory Panel on Valuing Financial Instruments in Inactive Markets: Update The staff presented the Board with an update on the work of the expert advisory panel formed in response to recommendations from constituents. The panels task is to develop best practice guidance on measurement and disclosures for financial instruments in inactive markets. It was noted that the panel had met six times and will meet again in October. One single document would be published covering both measurement and disclosure. A draft report has just been posted on the IASBs website. The staff informed the Board that although comments would be solicited until 3 October, comment letters would not be published on the IASBs website. Asked by a Board member, the staff confirmed that this non-mandatory guidance would be considered when developing the fair value measurement standard and, hence, might become mandatory in the future. Discussion at the September 2008 IASB Meeting Fair Value Measurements Exposure Draft The staff introduced the session by highlighting the objectives and timeline. The purpose of the session was to seek the Boards decision on: Whether a fair value measurement exposure draft should state that fair value reflects the highest and best use of an asset; and Whether blockage factors should be excluded from fair value measurement. Blockage factors The staff started with the second issue on blockage factors. The staff highlighted that it only sought the Boards input on this type of discount, not on other discounts or premia. The staff defined a blockage discounts as a discount that represents a discount to the quoted price of an instrument (usually equity securities) to reflect the reduction in the price if the entity were to sell a large holding of instruments at once. The Board had a lengthy debate on this. Some Board members were concerned about ignoring blockage factors as they would represent a real economic phenomenon. Others were of an opposite

How to Create Your Own Homeschool Curriculum

How to Create Your Own Homeschool Curriculum Many homeschooling parents- even those who start out using a pre-packaged curriculum- decide somewhere along the way to take advantage of the freedom homeschooling allows by creating their own course of study. If youve never created your own teaching plan, it can sound daunting. But taking the time to put together a customized curriculum for your family can save you money and make your homeschooling experience much more meaningful. Here are some general steps to follow to help you design a curriculum for any subject. 1. Review Typical Courses of Study by Grade First, you may want to research what other children in public and private schools are studying in each grade in order to make sure your children are covering approximately the same material as other students their age. The detailed guidelines linked below can help you set standards and goals for  your own curriculum. Typical Course of Study for Elementary SchoolTypical Course of Study for Sixth GradeTypical Course of Study for Seventh GradeTypical Course of Study for Eighth GradeTypical Course of Study for Ninth GradeTypical Course of Study for Tenth GradeTypical Course of Study for Eleventh GradeTypical Course of Study for Twelfth Grade 2. Do Your Research. Once you have determined what subjects you will cover, you may need to do some research to make sure you are up-to-date on the particular topic, particularly if its one you are not already familiar with.   One solid way to get a quick overview of a new subject? Read a well-written book on the topic aimed at middle schoolers! Books for that level will tell you everything you need to know to cover the topic for younger students, but still be comprehensive enough to get you started on a high school level. Other resources you can use include: Popular nonfiction young adult books;Websites about a subject for students;Review books written for high school students;Self-help books for adults (such as the For Dummies series);Textbooks, particularly ones that are recommended by other homeschoolers. As you read, make notes on key concepts and topics you may want to cover. 3. Identify Topics to Cover. Once youve gotten a broad view of the subject, start thinking about what concepts you want your children to learn. Dont feel you have to cover everything- many educators today feel that digging deep into a few core areas is more useful than skimming over many topics briefly. It helps if you organize related topics into units. That gives you more flexibility and cuts down on work. (See below for more work-saving tips.) 4. Ask Your Students. Ask your children what they would like to study. We all retain facts more readily when were studying a topic that captivates us. Your children may be interested in topics that fall right in line with what youd want to cover anyway, such as the American Revolution or insects. However, even topics that may not seem educational on the surface can provide valuable learning opportunities. You can study them as-is, weave in related concepts, or use them as a springboard for more in-depth topics. 5. Create a Timetable. Figure out how long you would like to spend on the subject. You can take a year, a semester, or a few weeks. Then decide how much time you want to devote to each topic you want to cover. I recommend creating a schedule around units instead of individual topics. Within that time period, you can list all the topics you think your family would like to learn about. But dont worry about individual topics until you get there. That way, if you decide to drop a topic, youll avoid doing extra work. For instance, you may want to devote three months to the Civil War. But you dont need to plan out how to cover each battle until you dive in and see how it goes. 6. Select High-quality Resources. One big plus of homeschooling is that it lets you use choose the very best resources available, whether they are textbooks or alternatives to textbooks. That includes picture books and comics, movies, videos, and toys and games, as well as online resources and apps. Fiction and narrative nonfiction (true stories about inventions and discoveries, biographies, and so on) can also be useful learning tools. 7. Schedule Related Activities. Theres more to learning a topic than accumulating facts. Help your kids put the topics you cover into context by scheduling in field trips, classes, and community events that relate to the subject you are studying. Search out museum exhibits or programs in your region. Find experts (college professors, craftspeople, hobbyists) who might be willing to talk to your family or homeschool group. And be sure to include lots of hands-on projects. You dont have to put them together from scratch there are lots of well-made science kits and arts and crafts kits, as well as activity books that give you step-by-step directions. Dont forget activities like  cooking, making costumes, creating ABC books, or building models. 8. Find Ways to Demonstrate What Your Kids Have Learned. Written tests are just one way to see how much your students  have learned about a subject. You can have them put together a research project that includes an essay, charts, timelines, and written or visual presentations. Kids can also reinforce what theyve learned by making artwork, writing stories or plays, or creating music inspired by the subject. Bonus Tips: How to make writing your own curriculum quicker and easier: Start small. When youre writing your own curriculum for the first time, it helps to start with one unit study or one subject.Keep it flexible. The more detailed your teaching plan, the less likely you are to stick to it. Within your subject, pick a few general topics you want to touch on. Dont worry if you come up with more topics than you can possibly cover in one year. If one topic doesnt work for your family, youll have options to move on to. And nothing says you cant continue on with a subject for more than a year.Choose topics that interest you and/or your kids. Enthusiasm is contagious. If you child is fascinated with a subject, chances are you will pick up some factoids about it as well. The same goes for you: Teachers who love their topic can make anything sound interesting. Writing your own curriculum doesnt have to be a daunting task. You might be surprised to discover how much you enjoy personalizing your familys curriculum- and how much you learn along the way. Updated by Kris Bales

American Perspective Short Stories Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

American Perspective Short Stories - Essay Example To analyze the cost of Vietnam War effectively, the two warring nations need to be treated as separate entities. This is because the costs incurred by the America were not similar to those incurred by the Vietnam. During the war, American suffered heavy losses that had long-lasting effect on its citizens and economy. Firstly, America lost nearly 58,000 people to the war. The dead included American combatants and service members serving at different battalions that were deployed in Vietnam (Bennett 162). The heavy casualty suffered by American servicemen and combatants in Vietnam caused the Americans to condemn the government for its decision to send troops to Vietnam. This shows that people were feeling the pinch of the war through the death of their relatives. The US also had to sustain the war by supplying equipment and ammunition to the service men and this contributed to the cost incurred by the country. In addition, Vietnam veteran suffered adverse health effects some that resul ted from Agent Orange that was used to eliminate Vietnam forest cover. This caused massive protests from war veterans that America had to deal with as long-term effects of the war. ... Between 1969 and 1973 nearly 107, 504 Vietnamese lost their lives. These figures may be slightly lower since most of Vietnamese deaths went on unreported. These deaths include those that occurred in the frontline and those that resulted from bombs dropped in Indochina. The civilian deaths resulting from the war were estimated to be 200,000 most of who died from starvation (Bennett 92). These figures are slightly lower since most civilian deaths were not recorded. After the war, Vietnam had to cope with the aftermath, which resulted from the devastating effects of the war. The bombs used by America on Vietnam fighters had long-lasting effects on the civilian population and environment. In addition, the country lost most of its infrastructures such as bridges to the war. This is because American bombers targeted such infrastructures as part of their combat strategy. In order to defeat the Vietnamese the American divided the country into portions or territories that later became indepen dent states. This political strategy was applied by the Americans to gain advantage over Vietnamese. The resultant states included Cambodia North and South Vietnam. This segregation partly resulted due to Soviet invasion and American strategy to win the war. The modern day radical movements such as al-Qaida and Taliban that have cost the US millions of dollars also have their roots in the Vietnam War. 2. What was the Bonus Army and what were the reasons and goals behind the movement? Was it successful? The World War I had a long-lasting effect on Americans and the country’s policy makers. The bonus army was a demonstration of the effects that the war had caused on the

Emergence of HIV and Drug Policy Ireland and Europe Essay

Emergence of HIV and Drug Policy Ireland and Europe - Essay Example In the year 2009, the number of new HIV positive cases was 395. Along with that, the total number of persons who have tested positive for HIV, in Ireland, stood at 5,637. It is also being estimated that, in that very year (2009), the total amount spent in the region (Ireland) spent towards HIV and several other communicable ailments was a staggering â‚ ¬114 million. This is way higher than the funds that have been allotted towards the same purpose, in countries such as Japan and Italy. (1) In the year 2009, there were two deaths that are directly attributable to HIV, and along with this, the total number of people who have died as result of AIDS, in Ireland, increased to 414. (1) At this juncture, a vital fact warrants special mention. Prior to the year 1985, HIV was not considered as that serious an ailment, by the Irish people. But in that year something happened, bringing about a drastic transformation in the manner in which the populace of Ireland viewed HIV. It was in the Oct ober of 1985 that the immensely popular actor, Rock Hudson, succumbed to HIV. That in fact was the first instance of Ireland where, the life of a celebrity was cut short by this deadly condition. It was only since then that the country’s people started to comprehend the seriousness of AIDS. For about the past two decades, the rise in incidence of HIV has tremendously influenced the drug policy of Ireland, as is the case with many other zones of the globe. The drug policy is based on the key objective of successfully combating the menace of wrong use of drugs. This in fact is amongst the primary causes of HIV in the country. The drug policy is being designed so as to be conducive for bringing out strategies that encourage community participation. Also, the policy strives to educate the citizens about the manner in which the risks of contracting HIV can be significantly minimized. (2) The aforesaid strategies are also aimed at enabling coordination amongst various health agenci es that are toiling in the realm. The drug policy was successful in identifying some zones of Ireland where, the residents are with limited economic strength. It was seen that, in these locations, the menace of drug abuse is rampant, and this invariably has a higher risk of HIV, as its inevitable consequence. The drug policy aims to form specialized task forces for implementing the strategies, in these zones. As a matter of fact, some sections of the Irish Society strongly opine that, a drug policy would be displaying comprehensive success, only if it is developed in such a way that it can easily be linked with other policies of the government, in the avenue of housing, employment and education, to cite a few. (2) It was felt that if the drug policy, instead of getting linked with all the above-mentioned policies, concentrates solely on altering the behavioral patterns of specified persons, key issues such as poverty and unemployment, etc, cannot be successfully addressed. In fact, it was also noted that the policy is now adopting a holistic approach for addressing the all-important issues. (2) Role of National Aids Strategy Committee Various NGOs that were also inclusive of drug agencies first started to work in the avenue of HIV, when people utilizing their services became HIV positive. These NGOs have meets at specified

How does Byron present the lovers Essay Example for Free

How does Byron present the lovers Essay Byron feels very strongly about love, believing it to be a very good thing, especially when found in the young. Thus he presents the two lovers as sweet and beautiful. A third adjective, innocent could be added to the list and in Juans case certainly should be-however, throughout the passage we find hints that it does not apply to Julia. In stanza 106 Byron says that her creed in her own innocence was immense. So she believes forcefully that what she is doing is innocent and not wrong, and yet she knows it is: . she inly swore. she never would disgrace this ring she wore. However, Byron does not damn her for thinking of Don Alfonsos fifty years, instead he justifies this behaviour in the hole of stanza 108. This is most probably because of Byrons own feelings on the matter of love he would not have backed away from extra-marital or adulterous love, believing infidelity to be a social normality. He believed that no shackles should be placed on love; it should be natural, and indeed this is how, to some extent, he does portray the love which blossoms here, though not as much as Juans later relationship with Haidei , unconsciously she leaned upon [Juan] So, Byron shows us that Julia is aware of the wrongness of her impending deed, but he does not condemn her. Indeed it could be argued that Byron presents her infidelity as sweet and innocent in itself. The evidence for this can be found in the rhyming couplet at the end of stanza 105. One hand on Juans was carelessly thrown, Quite by mistake she thought it was her own. Clearly Julia knows the hand is Juans, but the lines are very tongue-in-cheek, and seem to be actually poking fun, very gently, at Julias pathetic attempts to make it seem as if she isnt doing what she is. Byron is amused at her mock innocence and this in turn leads us to see her actions as less brazen and more innocent than they might seem. The fact remains though, that Julia is not innocent of adultery and this is conclusively shown in the lines, Yet still she must have thought there was no harm, / Or else twere easy to withdraw her waist. So she is portrayed, seemingly paradoxically as a sweet and innocent, but knowing, adulterer. Don Juan, on the other hand, being only a young boy of sixteen is portrayed as completely nai ve and innocent. His young lip thanked it with a grateful kiss And then abashed at its own joy, withdrew In deep despair, lest he had done amiss. The reader knows that he is completely nai ve, having previously read of his breeding, which was strictly moral. So it comes as no surprise then that in this, his first romantic encounter, he should be ignorant of what to do and that Byron should portray him as he does. In conclusion then, the lovers are portrayed in some ways similarly but very differently in other respects. Byron reflects his attitude to love in portraying Juan and Julia as helpless in the face of their over-riding emotions he describes love as strengthening the weak and trampling the strong. This conclusion will suffice in the case of Juan but Julia is helpless in a different way. She is more worldly wise than Juan, having been married, and thus, almost certainly, sexual intercourse. She is portrayed as one caught in the middle of two pulling forces her own honour, virtue, truth and love for Don Alfonso, and her love for Juan. She knows that to display this love physically would be wrong, but she does it anyway And whispering, I will neer consent consented. Byron, however, does not condemn her for her actions, because of his belief in the power of love, and he portrays her still as a virtuous and sweet young woman, despite her immoral conduct. A little still she strove and much repented, at the end of the passage shows she is still a woman of integrity, rather than one of loose morals. This is how Byron portrays the individual lovers. Together, they are depicted as a beautiful couple how beautiful she looked, full of the initial exuberance of first love. Byron emphasizes the purity and goodness of their love over its illegitimacy in the eyes of the world and society, justifying it as much by describing its beauty as by showing why Julias marriage with Alfonso is not pure and good in stanza 108. In this respect Byrons portrayal of the lovers in this passage is a continuation of the general theme of the hypocrisy of society in Don Juan. Ironically, Byron shows us, Julias legitimate marriage is un-natural and not really that good, whereas her illegal relationship with Juan is described with beautiful poetry, and is clearly more natural and proper than that of the former.

Orange Juice (The Godfather) :: essays research papers

**Orange Juice** Contrast and Irony†¦ Gentle moments in the story keep it realistic while the larger plot progresses and sucks us in. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction- The Godfather will make sure. Not a killer by his definition, The Godfather does not mix family and business matters, yet family and crime abound. And justice prevails however it may. Transitions in the montage after Michael killed two of his first marks in the restaurant explain exactly how the â€Å"family† works. One scene shows a family member playing the piano, then cuts artfully to another of a dead body. The piano player still playing directly above the body. A spectacular illustration of how the family mastered the art of playing others. The opening line: â€Å"I believe in America† (spoken by the undertaker, no less)-contrasted later in the film by another scene in which one of the family appears to be peeing on the Statue of Liberty, seen in the distance. So much for believing in America after all. The feel of viewing the world through dark sunglasses on an already cloudy day versus the bright, relaxed feeling of the Sicilian scenes creates even more contrast and confusion. The characters hidden from the viewer’s eye in the United States, while Michael hides in Sicily. Images of these scenes prevail in viewers minds, taking us to a happier time and place while we wonder what the Corleone family has up their sleeves in America. The Godfather grants favors- as a self-benefit of course- because the favors control those whom that they are meant for. Corleone has granted favors, but those who have received them will be in his debt and one day, they're afraid, they will be called upon to make-good the favor of the Godfather. Crime merely illustrates the degree of power this family holds. Don Corleone can make it happen- with â€Å"offers that can not be refused†. People are killed just to show who is boss. Even the raspy voice in which the Godfather grants the favors lends to a colossal sense of power, as does his sharply shaped, well-manicured mustache. Michael’s injury transitions his speech and he begins to speak like his father- his power becomes obvious. At the baptism of Connie and Carlo’s son, the film cuts to show the murders Michael has ordered. The patriarchs of the â€Å"five families†. The final montage artfully suggests that the murders and baptism occur simultaneously.